This presentation explores how bureaucratic structures influence collaboration and provides recommendations for how new initiatives can gain traction. While some specifics here pertain to the unique elements of the LDS Church, these dynamics can be observed in many large organizations trying to operate at scale.

1. A bishop and a manager
walk into a conference
room…
Organization communication dynamics at play in
the business of supporting the Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints.

2. The Initial Request
• The organization is looking to simplify Church
messaging efforts, especially in digital channels.
• Part of this effort is the creation of a style guide to
create a stronger user experience on member-
facing websites.
• I was asked to research and recommend a process
for implementing and maintaining this style guide.

3. So how’s it been
happening up to now?
This is a new process
under new leadership.
But we’ve been
creating websites
for twenty years.

4. How does this inform
the new process?
So how’s it been
happening up to now?
This is a new process
under new leadership.
But we’ve been
creating websites
for twenty years.

5. How does this inform
the new process?
This meant taking a step back to
understand the organizational
communication dynamics behind how
the corporation works.

6. Traditional Bureaucracy

7. Bureaucracies are built for
efficiency. Clearly defined titles
and roles allow that to happen.
Individuals gain power in each
bureaucratic structure (silo)
through demonstrated
expertise and experience: new
titles and new roles.
There’s allocative efficiency
in each department doing its
own thing with its own
bureaucratic structure (silo).

8. Referential power is given
by the silo.

9. Referential power is given
by the silo.
What happens when new
innovations require cross-
department collaboration?

10. What happens when new
innovations require cross-
department interaction?
Group members will attempt to establish referential
power one with another (perhaps through
functional theory or garbage can model decision
making).

11. What happens when new
innovations require cross-
department interaction?
Group members will attempt to establish referential
power one with another (perhaps through
functional theory or garbage can model decision
making).
When referential power can’t be established and
collaboration stalls, the group will likely either
disband or resort to reward/coercion power plays.

12. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.
Key Findings

13. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.

14. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.
Illusion of Precedence In our organization,
precedent equals approval. Messages are not
created equal and do not share equal priority. If a
group can draw comparisons between their new
effort and something that’s previously been done
(whether it’s comparable or not is another issue all
together), it increases the likelihood of approval.
1

15. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.
Illusion of Scarcity Individuals/groups can
minimize the role of input from others through
creating timelines and resource constraints based
on timelines that pinch the planning, research, and
creative process.
1 2

16. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.
Illusion of Authority To consolidate power, a
manager might suggest a timeline or other elements
of a product to their ecclesiastical leadership, and
then communicate such to other departments in
terms that imply that such was the request/
requirement of the ecclesiastical leadership.
1 2 3

17. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.
1 2 3
• Illusion of Precedence
• Illusion of Scarcity
• Illusion of Authority

18. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.
Key Findings

19. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.
New initiatives involving multiple departments in a
traditional bureaucracy make the most progress
when they have clear executive sponsorship.
Key Findings

20. New initiatives involving multiple departments in a
traditional bureaucracy make the most progress
when they have clear executive sponsorship.

21. The organization is
built to:

22. The organization is
being asked to:

23. An executive
sponsor creates
effective relational
power across the
organization.

24. Culturally, we’re all invested in doing what the
ecclesiastical leadership asks us to do. An executive
sponsor has a direct line to that group.

25. Individuals and departments use strategic
ambiguity to consolidate power and exert
influence on other departments.
New initiatives involving multiple departments in a
traditional bureaucracy make the most progress
when they have clear executive sponsorship.
Key Findings

26. Recommendations
Provide clear data and
documentation for each
decision.
Align the new style-
guide process
with the CSC.
Collect business
objectives through
the process.
Clearly identify roles
and process (create
referential power
documentation).
Executive sponsor
“road show” with
department leadership.

27. Thank You.